Argument I is strong because it interprets the survey conducted recently and emphasises on 'yes'. But II is not strong. What has been banned in Chennai should not necessarily be banned in other metropolitan cities.
I is strong because economy can flourish only when its backbone is strong. II is weak because it does not cite any substantial reason. What does ''too big a role'' mean?
I is strong because a hung parliament must be got rid of for the benefit of nation. II is also strong because elections carry the mandate of voters. If they are cheated, the very purpose of elections is lost.
I is not strong. If the surveys are fake, there is nothing wrong whit surveys per se. If a fault creeps into a method, we should correct the method instead of discarding it. II is strong because in a buyer 's market, you must know the consumer behavior thoroughly to stay ahead of your competitors.
I is weak because it seems to be at best a joke and at worst a whim . It is not acceptable to reason. Economists, even when in large numbers, are only a handful. So how much do you think you can gain by giving them some other employment? And if you think the devil lies in their theories- that two economists seldom agree-, let me tell you it's a healthy trend. Critics are very important in the upliftment of a society. II is strong because the more the awareness, the greater the activity. See how our economy has developed in recent years.
In 'hire and fire' policy, performing employees are rewarded while non-performing employees are show the door. This increases the level of efficiency and profitability. So, Arguments I and III are strong while Argument II is not.
I is strong because it cares for consumers and manufactures both. II is weak. Because it wrongly assumes that there is no way of hallmarking of gold without damaging its utility.
I is strong because it advocates for the interests of farmer and industries, the backbone of our country. II is weak due to the wording ''at all costs''.
I does not answer how the real prosperity of nation will come thought the move. Hence I is weak. II is also weak because it does not say how the free railway pass will be harmful to students.
I is strong on humanitarian ground. II is also strong because this is the ultimate step to restrict the mob.
I Only I is strong. Quality of a doctor must not be neglected. II is not strong because it adds nothing to the statement.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.